使用中国东部癌症登记数据评估儿童癌症患者的长期生存:周期分析优于传统分析。

IF 4.7 2区 医学 Q1 ONCOLOGY
Xin Bing, Qiqi Lei, Liangyou Wang, Xiaojiao Zhao, Xukai Chen, Luyao Zhang, Asta Försti, Jun Yang, Tianhui Chen
{"title":"使用中国东部癌症登记数据评估儿童癌症患者的长期生存:周期分析优于传统分析。","authors":"Xin Bing, Qiqi Lei, Liangyou Wang, Xiaojiao Zhao, Xukai Chen, Luyao Zhang, Asta Försti, Jun Yang, Tianhui Chen","doi":"10.1002/ijc.70060","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>This study systematically evaluated whether period analysis outperforms traditional cohort and complete analyses in estimating 5-year relative survival (RS) for childhood cancer patients using data from nine cancer registries in Taizhou, Eastern China (2009-2018). Analyses included patients under 15 years diagnosed with childhood cancers, with 5-year RS estimates from cohort, complete, and period methods compared against observed actual survival (2014-2018: 70.1%). Accuracy and robustness were assessed via deviation value (DV) and standard error (SE). Cohort analysis yielded a 5-year RS of 55.8% (DV: -14.3%, SE: 2.4), complete analysis 61.1% (DV: -9.0%, SE: 1.7), and period analysis 68.2% (DV: -1.9%, SE: 2.1). Stratified evaluations by sex, region, age at diagnosis, and cancer types confirmed period analysis as the most accurate (lowest DV across subgroups) while complete analysis showed the smallest SE values, indicating superior robustness. Cohort analysis performed the worst in both accuracy and robustness. This study is the first in China to validate that period analysis offers superior accuracy in estimating 5-year RS for childhood cancer patients overall and across various stratifications compared to cohort and complete analyses. Findings underscore the utility of period analysis in generating timely survival estimates to inform early detection strategies and cancer control policies, offering critical methodological support for advancing pediatric oncology outcomes assessment in China.</p>","PeriodicalId":180,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Cancer","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":4.7000,"publicationDate":"2025-07-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Assessment of long-term survival in childhood cancer patients using cancer registry data from eastern China: Period analysis outperforms traditional analysis.\",\"authors\":\"Xin Bing, Qiqi Lei, Liangyou Wang, Xiaojiao Zhao, Xukai Chen, Luyao Zhang, Asta Försti, Jun Yang, Tianhui Chen\",\"doi\":\"10.1002/ijc.70060\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>This study systematically evaluated whether period analysis outperforms traditional cohort and complete analyses in estimating 5-year relative survival (RS) for childhood cancer patients using data from nine cancer registries in Taizhou, Eastern China (2009-2018). Analyses included patients under 15 years diagnosed with childhood cancers, with 5-year RS estimates from cohort, complete, and period methods compared against observed actual survival (2014-2018: 70.1%). Accuracy and robustness were assessed via deviation value (DV) and standard error (SE). Cohort analysis yielded a 5-year RS of 55.8% (DV: -14.3%, SE: 2.4), complete analysis 61.1% (DV: -9.0%, SE: 1.7), and period analysis 68.2% (DV: -1.9%, SE: 2.1). Stratified evaluations by sex, region, age at diagnosis, and cancer types confirmed period analysis as the most accurate (lowest DV across subgroups) while complete analysis showed the smallest SE values, indicating superior robustness. Cohort analysis performed the worst in both accuracy and robustness. This study is the first in China to validate that period analysis offers superior accuracy in estimating 5-year RS for childhood cancer patients overall and across various stratifications compared to cohort and complete analyses. Findings underscore the utility of period analysis in generating timely survival estimates to inform early detection strategies and cancer control policies, offering critical methodological support for advancing pediatric oncology outcomes assessment in China.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":180,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"International Journal of Cancer\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":4.7000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-07-23\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"International Journal of Cancer\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1002/ijc.70060\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"ONCOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Journal of Cancer","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1002/ijc.70060","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ONCOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

本研究使用中国东部台州9个癌症登记处(2009-2018年)的数据,系统评估了周期分析在估计儿童癌症患者5年相对生存率(RS)方面是否优于传统的队列分析和完整分析。分析包括15岁以下诊断为儿童癌症的患者,通过队列、完整和周期方法估计的5年RS与观察到的实际生存率(2014-2018年:70.1%)进行比较。通过偏差值(DV)和标准误差(SE)评估准确性和稳健性。队列分析的5年RS为55.8% (DV: -14.3%, SE: 2.4),完整分析为61.1% (DV: -9.0%, SE: 1.7),周期分析为68.2% (DV: -1.9%, SE: 2.1)。按性别、地区、诊断时年龄和癌症类型进行的分层评估证实,周期分析最准确(亚组中DV最低),而完整分析显示SE值最小,表明鲁棒性较好。队列分析在准确性和稳健性方面表现最差。与队列分析和完整分析相比,该研究首次在中国验证了时期分析在估计儿童癌症患者总体和不同分层的5年生存率方面具有更高的准确性。研究结果强调了周期分析在产生及时的生存估计,为早期发现策略和癌症控制政策提供信息方面的效用,为推进中国儿科肿瘤预后评估提供了关键的方法学支持。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Assessment of long-term survival in childhood cancer patients using cancer registry data from eastern China: Period analysis outperforms traditional analysis.

This study systematically evaluated whether period analysis outperforms traditional cohort and complete analyses in estimating 5-year relative survival (RS) for childhood cancer patients using data from nine cancer registries in Taizhou, Eastern China (2009-2018). Analyses included patients under 15 years diagnosed with childhood cancers, with 5-year RS estimates from cohort, complete, and period methods compared against observed actual survival (2014-2018: 70.1%). Accuracy and robustness were assessed via deviation value (DV) and standard error (SE). Cohort analysis yielded a 5-year RS of 55.8% (DV: -14.3%, SE: 2.4), complete analysis 61.1% (DV: -9.0%, SE: 1.7), and period analysis 68.2% (DV: -1.9%, SE: 2.1). Stratified evaluations by sex, region, age at diagnosis, and cancer types confirmed period analysis as the most accurate (lowest DV across subgroups) while complete analysis showed the smallest SE values, indicating superior robustness. Cohort analysis performed the worst in both accuracy and robustness. This study is the first in China to validate that period analysis offers superior accuracy in estimating 5-year RS for childhood cancer patients overall and across various stratifications compared to cohort and complete analyses. Findings underscore the utility of period analysis in generating timely survival estimates to inform early detection strategies and cancer control policies, offering critical methodological support for advancing pediatric oncology outcomes assessment in China.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
13.40
自引率
3.10%
发文量
460
审稿时长
2 months
期刊介绍: The International Journal of Cancer (IJC) is the official journal of the Union for International Cancer Control—UICC; it appears twice a month. IJC invites submission of manuscripts under a broad scope of topics relevant to experimental and clinical cancer research and publishes original Research Articles and Short Reports under the following categories: -Cancer Epidemiology- Cancer Genetics and Epigenetics- Infectious Causes of Cancer- Innovative Tools and Methods- Molecular Cancer Biology- Tumor Immunology and Microenvironment- Tumor Markers and Signatures- Cancer Therapy and Prevention
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信